Can We Appropriate the Rich? (Re: Surplus NOT from Capital GainsReceipts

Andrew English aenglish at igc.org
Fri Jul 28 14:17:02 PDT 2000


I definite agree with the need for universal programs and also with "soak the extremely rich" taxes even if we can't limit it to just them and also soak the merely very rich as well.

However, I wonder if you are underestimating much we could get out of the top 1% in the best of all worlds. Bill Gates' $40 billion alone could go a long way.

But then I'm not an economist.

-Andy English

From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com>.
>
>Nathan, I'm not talking about programs to benefit just the
>below-median crowd. I'm talking about basic social democratic
>programs - universal health coverage, free tuition, etc. And to fund
>those you can't just tax the top 1% of the population.
>
>Talking about political losers, countries with "targeted" programs,
>like the U.S. (and your buddy Bill loves targeted programs) have
>higher poverty rates and cheesier benefit packages than those with
>universal programs. Targeted programs are also politically less
>secure than universal ones, as the transformation of AFDC into TANF
>shows. Also, note that most "tax rebellions" have happened in the
>liberal countries, with their targeted programs; they haven't really
>happened in the social democracies with universal programs. So your
>brand of realpolitik ends up being a worse long-term arrangement than
>something more ambitious might be. As they said in '68, be
>reasonable, demand the impossible.
>
>Doug



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list